One More Time - Toxic Leaders Create Toxic Consequences

Toxic Leaders Results Create Toxic Consequences

Having the right person in the right job at the right time is extremely valuable to any organization; unfortunately the inverse of this is also tragically true. Having the wrong person, a toxic person, at the wrong time in the wrong job can lead to unforeseeable tragedy and negative consequences. Sometimes these behavior lapses were known prior to these people being placed in positions of leadership and influence and still somehow this tragedy and toxicity is repeated over and over again.

There is no doubt that few of you have ever heard of Samuel Tankersley Williams, or heard someone refer to him by his nickname “Hanging Sam.” As you continue to read this month’s newsletter no doubt almost all of you will know of the military conflict where he left an indelible mark, and unceremoniously led the United States towards disastrous consequences.

“Hanging Sam” Williams was a US Army general, who had the dubious honor of actually being demoted and removed from command during the Second World War. “Hanging Sam” had a reputation of being abrasive, rude, demeaning and belittling to those around him. Even his own biographer said in his treatment of his subordinates “he caused ulcers, mid career burnouts, heart attacks, divorces, and the resignations of commissioned officers of the regular army.” History is full of lackluster generals who eventually retire without much fanfare or lasting damage, but that is not the case for Samuel Williams. He was able to resurrect his career after World War Two and, in 1959 as a 3 star general, he was given command of the military assistance mission to a tiny Southeast Asian country - you know it better as then South Vietnam. 

“Hanging Sam” Williams, was the wrong person, in the wrong job, at the wrong time. In command of the Military Assistance Command Vietnam (MACV) he openly criticized the US ambassador in public, contradicted US foreign policy, and emboldened corruption within the South Vietnamese army and government. He also fomented a command climate that didn’t allow for his own advisors to report on the progress of the training and equipping of the South Vietnamese army. It is unreasonable to blame the United States experience in Vietnam entirely on the mismanagement and command culture that Sam Williams created. Nonetheless it no doubt created for the United States a much bigger problem in an already tenuous environment, at the onset of our involvement in the Vietnam War.

The Importance of Individual Accountability

Quint Studer has said, “Allowing employees with a bad attitude to work in the organization is a morale killer. When leaders begin to hold employees accountable for their attitudes and ask those to leave who do not meet standards of behavior, organizations receive a huge boost.” (See his book Hardwiring Excellence [Gulf Breeze, Fla.: Fire Starter Publishing, 2003], p. 81.)

Conventional thinking would have us believe we should be spending the majority of our time trying to “cure” the ills of our problem employees at the expense of investing that time developing the skill and talent of our middle and high-level performers. We need to challenge this thinking and have the courage to replace it with a model that focuses on developing and exploiting the skills of our high performers while mitigating the detrimental behavior of the problem employee. Build a culture based on individual accountability and you will eliminate your recruiting and retention problem. You will also gain the respect and appreciation of your loyal and productive members of the organization.

Energy Better Spent

Don’t misunderstand this point – the work of The Center for Influential Leadership places great emphasis on performance coaching and counseling to achieve optimal performance outcomes. Providing resources and training to people with the right attitude will help them learn and grow, allowing them to be highly productive. But we spend far too much time trying to coach the negative attitudes of problem employees than we do with those employees who want to improve their skills, who desire to contribute to the greater good of the organization, but who simply lack the requisite technical skill or knowledge to do so effectively.

Virtually all the advice on getting people to engage their work and increase their productivity is predicated on a false assumption, namely that any form of outside influence will result in lasting internal change, stimulating pride, purpose, motivation and a positive attitude. Unlike animals, human beings have the power to choose inappropriate behavior and substandard performance, and willfully do so, even in the face of overwhelming negative consequences. Consequently, the current model for how to manage employees is ineffective. We need to focus our leadership energy into the high- and mid-level performers rather than investing ourselves in those who are choosing substandard attitudes and behaviors.

We would like to believe that the individuals we hire already have an understanding of the values and ethics required to be successful in our workplaces. Unfortunately, some people are working only for their paycheck regardless of their capability to perform tasks to standards and regardless of their pitiful attitude and toxic behavior toward others.

No amount of encouragement, incentive, coaching, counseling, positive reinforcement, discipline, or “how-positive-I-am-in-my-belief” that they can change has any impact on these people. Until they choose to become a different person, a more positive person, a more caring person, a less selfish person, a less bitter person, a less angry person, a less “the world owes me” kind of person, we are left with little choice but to remove them from our organizations as quickly as possible. When we do, teamwork will improve within and across department lines. There will be an immediate release of creativity and prudent risk taking and innovation to improve processes.

If you think for a minute that you have a responsibility to rehabilitate these people, or that recruiting and training a new hire to replace them will be too costly, you are wrong. Unless you have a willingness to hold them accountable, they will remain in your organization far too long, requiring hours of documentation for your human resources department and labor attorney. Eventually, when you are compelled to fire these people, you still will face a lawsuit because you have given them time to build an employment history they will use against you in court.

At the end of the day empowering and enabling toxic leaders and employees will only get you toxic results. You must determine within yourself that your staff, your organization and you deserve better. Sadly many times over, we cannot reform toxic leaders; they simply must be let go. Retaining ineffective leaders only leads to negative outcomes. That’s worth thinking about today.